potiuk commented on issue #51821: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/51821#issuecomment-4187340652
@foldvari I suggest that you create a sevlist discussion about it. Even if there are some good reasons to bring it back, it will also introduce a breaking behaviour for thosw.who have Airflow 3.0 - 3.2. I was not the one to intoe this change and it's not me to decide on it at the stage it is in right now. If you want to restore the old behaviour, the right way is to: * Raise it as a DISCUSS thread in devlist (you need to subscribe first - see community tab on our website) * Explain in the thread why you think we should treat it as a bug fix and what kind of consequences it will have for Airflow 3.0- 3.2 users now, when changes. Generally the benefits of it will have to put weight the drawbacks. * If you see consensus - starting LAZY CONSENSUS thread should be enough * Otherwis VOTE thread should be started and community should vote it in You can see past similar discussions in devlist by searching for those keywords. Right now the cat is out of the bag and people already rely on this behaviour, so the only way to get it in before Airflow 4 is to get the community agree on it as 'unintended behaviour change' and agree that it'a ok to bring it back weighting risks connected with those who already use Airflow 3 where they will have to deal with this behaviour. Ideally such discussion should be accompanied with a PR fixing it and describing the significan newsfragment where you would explain the message to pass and communication to Airflow 3 users explaining why we do it and what should Airflow 3 users do to address their issues. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
